As another side note, don't move pages to your userspace, either - they should remain where they originally were while discussion is completed.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 09:11, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Hamish, it isn't necessary whatsoever. That is what the current SDS page does, and I don't think we would have all the information to fall back on. Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 19:16, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ken I did not actually think that their would be debate on this issue so I removed it from the mainspace.Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 21:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

I also agree with Hamish — there are more than 100 SDS studios.bigpuppytalk|contribs 23:42, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

WWWWOOOOOAAAAHHHH THE HAMISH TALKS

IT RISES

Okay anyway, I agree with Hamish. There are just too many SDS's, and they would probably all just be stubs anyway.Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 18:30, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Template Suggestion

I think we need a new discussion template that would signify that a topic has had discussion but needs a reply from the owner or one of the participants. This would be very useful when something needs done and a user needs permission to do that thing but the topic has gone a bit inactive.

The template would look like this:
Waiting...

Please note this would not be the same as the doing template because it wouldn't be used when someone is doing something, only when they are about to do something, need permission to do something etc.

I think this template is actually somewhere between {{not done}} and {{doing}} - nobody's actively working on it, so it's not done - but specifically, the discussion is waiting for... not a reply exactly, it's waiting for action. Maybe change the name to "awaiting action"?

By the way, if a template has two words, the second word should really never be capitalized. Therefore the name should be "awaiting action" and not "Awaiting Action".kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 14:14, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Actually, now that I think about it, the name could be "waiting" instead - that's a lot shorter, and more concise. The text can stay the same, though.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 02:20, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

A "not done" topic got archived

This topic is still relevant - my transcluded edit count is about 300-400 behind the count on the special page. I've moved it back here (below this section) but it still needs to be removed from the archive.

finding velocity with direction

hello, i was thinking that we should have a page about how to find velocity(x speed and y speed) with the direction and speed of the sprite. we currently have a page about Finding Direction With Velocity and i think we should also have a page about how to do the oppositeJonathanSchaffer (talk | contribs) 20:04, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Now that sounds like a nice idea. My only recommendations would be to link the two articles, a simple touch. ErnieParke (talk | contribs)

Suggestion: Change the deletion convention a little

So currently we have {{NotUseful}} for pages that could be deleted and {{delete}} for pages that actually need to be deleted (by consensus or userspace). I suggest changing this up a little. Change "NotUseful" to "delete" and change "delete" to "speedy delete".

So this would mean that if a page has "delete" on it, it has been nominated for deletion but discussion should start/is still ongoing; while if a page has "speedy delete" on it, it obviously meets the deletion criteria (i.e. consensus reached, obvious vandalism or violation of guidelines, in userspace and template was placed by owner) and should be deleted immediately.

Force using edit summaries (partially)

Lately I've seen that very few new users use edit summaries, and some old users too. I propose that we make the default settings remind them to use edit summaries - that means, if they try to save without a summary (simply a section title is counted as an empty summary) they are reminded to use an edit summary. To implement this, the following needs to be added to LocalSettings.php:

I agree, and I will admit that I got into the habit of not using edit summaries properly at one point. Btw, Is this not the same as the test wiki etc? -Vuton- (Talk | Contribs | Pages) 17:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kenny2scratch: I‘m not quite happy that now you have to click „save“ always two times, also if you don‘t want to give a summary, specially at talk-pages. Couldn‘t we accept one save click if you also check the „Minor change“ box? It would be helpfull if then the summary was automatically the section you edited, so you could see which talk-page-thread got a new post in „last changes“. I don‘t think that more detailed summarys are helpful at talk pages, IMHO it’s waste of time. MartinWollenweberTalkContribsDirectory 08:20, 22 February 2018 (CET)

When replying on a talk page, you usually use the edit summary "reply to ExampleUser" - so the edit summary for this edit would be "reply to MartinWollenweber". It helps keep the discussion organized, and people in the recent changes can see who you are replying to.

It's not really possible (AFAIK) to only force edit summaries with non-minor edits; I don't really know how to make that happen. Sorry.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 12:26, 22 February 2018 (CET)

Unified login

I was reading the 74th archive and I came across this. This actually seems like a good idea.

What is "unified login"?

Unified login is one account being connected across all wikis, with one login - no need to re-request an account.

Why would we want it?

Less barriers! Instead of having to re-request an account on all wikis you want to edit (assuming you know the language) you can instead simply log in with your credentials from the Test Wiki and start editing.

Which wiki would be the "meta" wiki?

The test wiki - it is the only wiki that isn't in one particular language, and really just fits as a meta wiki. The test wiki being the meta wiki means that having an account on the English or German or whatever language wiki is not enough - only a test wiki account will allow unified login.

(+1) If we do, somebody (like me) has to merge the account. The time will be the Server Migration. --Apple502jTalk/Activities1,754edit 09:56, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Unified accounts are very interesting and I'm used to it as an author of the German and English Wikipedia. But I suppose it's not worth the amount of work, because just a few authors need access to more than one languages wikis. Also it would cause new problems .e.g.:

different language wikis have different conditions for granting authors rights with good reasons: Where the en-scratch-wiki has high barriors because it can afford to be very selective, wikis of smaller languages have much lower conditions for new authors

A really big advantage was a shared Media-Usage, like wikipedia has it. We kind of achive the same by copying all media by bot to the TEST-wiki and from there to new REAL-Wikis.

I think much more helpfull was a wiki farm, wether with or without unified accounting system. Some time ago I did some research about that, but there seemed to be not much interest by others and I couldn't invest enough time. See:

+0 now. I feel it is a good idea, but what about users with different usernames against all wikis? With unified login introduced, they'll have multiple accounts, which is against the guidelines. Also, if my wiki gets merged, we'll have Kenny2scratch on my wiki and Kenny2edible on here. banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,994)) 08:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

WikiMonitor 2 is live!

As part of the migration of the Wiki to the new server, a bunch of the API changed. WikiMonitor depended on the old API specs, which meant I had to rewrite a bunch of the code to work with the new ones. The way I did it is that I kept the old version running on the old domain while working on writing a new version to work with the new API specs. Since this involved examining a lot of the code, I noticed a few bugs. I only fixed these bugs in the new version, since I didn't want to risk breaking the old version when it would only be running for a few more weeks. The two main bugs were having multiple editors triggering the rapid edit notice and a few things that don't count as new messages that still get people notices for not signing their posts.

TLDR: I upgraded WikiMonitor to work on this domain and fixed some bugs. Please let me know if you notice any problems.

(Also, I am proud to announce that this is the first post on the new CP!)
jvvg (talk | contribs) 02:43, 17 February 2018 (CET)

odd

Basically, the Scratch Team did not wish to devote the resources to continue maintaining the Wiki. By transferring it here, they no longer have to host it and non-ST members can run it.jvvg (talk | contribs) 05:45, 17 February 2018 (CET)

Making Kenny2Scratch an EW

Hi everyone! If you want more information on why we performed the server more, please see MakeTheBrainHappy's post here. Below I will be discussing the permission bump for Kenny2Scratch.

Kenny2Scratch has been a very active editor and coder for the international Scratch wikis for several months now, having started with the test wiki and eventually expanding from there. As he's completed more tasks, he has gained both more permissions and trust from the sysop team for the wikis. As such, it is unfair for him to be left without bureaucrat powers on the English wiki when he has them everywhere else.

Hopefully this isn't too surprising.

If anyone has questions about the move in general, feel free to ask. ErnieParke (talk | contribs) 05:55, 17 February 2018 (CET)

I completely agree. Kenny2Scratch proved, that he has the knowlege, the endurance and not at least the responsiblity to fulfill the important roles of admin, bureaucrat and ftp-admin. I‘m really happy about the development since I asked him if he would like to help with the international scratch wikis (here). He gained more and more of my trust since then. Without him the transfer and many other technical things would have been much more difficult for us. @Kenny2Scratch: Thank you and good luck and as much wisdom as neccesary to fulfill your high responsible roles in the future to the best use of our scratch wiki community. „May the force be with you.“ ;-) MartinWollenweberTalkContribsDirectory 18:24, 17 February 2018 (CET)

Thank you! I wonder how much I will actually need to use my new userrights, but I am glad I can use them if needed. Title should be making me a bureaucrat, yes - but not "Kenny2Scratch"! The S is never capitalized ;)kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 05:29, 18 February 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
I've always been very particular about my name and how people refer to me. Below are all of the things you can call me:

Welcome back at the English Scratch Wiki at its new domain. Many thanks to Kenny2Scratch and ErnieParke (and others, see Scratch Wiki#Server Transfer) for managing the transfer so smooth! I think it could help, to give some background information about the transfer again:

The Scratch Team said that it has not the capacity to maintain the Scratch Wiki in the way it should be cared for and that it wants to strengthen the Scratch Wiki by the opportunity to care for maintenance itself (FTP, Addons, server...)

I think the Scratch Team asked me to host the English Scratch Wiki, because I'm hosting all other Scratch Wikis for the international Scratch Wiki community for years and our community is active since Scratch launched in 2007. So we already proved the experience and the long-time interest to care for the community as good as possible.

FTP-Access will be given to admins of the English Scratch Wiki, so the community them self will maintain the English Scratch Wiki. That will be a big advantage regarding possibilities to fulfil the needs of the community much better and faster than before. Many admins of the English Wiki have already experience with that job because they helped the international Scratch Wikis, (see user with FTP access here)

The "bureaucrat state" that today is hold by Scratch Team members will be hold by me and long time admins. I'm not interested to get deep involved in admin work at the English Scratch Wiki, so this will continue to be done by elected Scratch Wikians them self.

The Scratch Team rejected our suggestions to have an own main-menu-button for the Scratch-Wiki and to bring back the menu-button for the forum. We suggested: "use an icon for both, so there's is enough room for all that menue items". They said it's not only about the menu-space but they want to strengthen the communication at project-, studio- and user-pages. They said statistics showed, that there has been no decrease of forum-posting after taking away the menu-entry.(IMHO as long as there is one event linking to the forum and one linking to the wiki via forum (wiki wednesday) there is no real problem because that‘s nearly as good as an menueentry or even better)

The Scratch Team promised to continue Wiki Wednesday, so this strong connection between Wiki and website will continue. Also the Scratch Wiki link in the footer of the Scratch Website will stay

The Scratch Team promised that we will have "blue clickable links" resulting from all kind of edits containing Scratch Wiki Links at the Scratch Website. This will not only refer to the English Scratch Wiki like today, but also to Scratch Wikis of all languages (today edits with links to this wikis result in no clickable url-adresses)

The Scratch Team said that for legal reasons they will have to implement a kind of warning like "you're leaving Scratch website" when changing to the Scratch Wikis. We hope, this will be as restrained as possible.

I hope we can concentrate on the advantages here. As I see it, the Scratch Wiki community loses not much, but wins a lot of freedom. Which suggestion do you have for using that that freedom?
MartinWollenweberTalkContribsDirectory 07:04, 17 February 2018 (CET)

Yes. I would like to reiterate my thanks to everyone who helped with the successful transfer. Traffic will probably decrease which means that we will need to look for new sources of users. We will probably need to integrate more with the main website through the community, release more press releases, and begin many more community initiatives similar to what exists on the DACH- Wiki. The change also allows us to reevaluate some of our more controversial policies and our role in the scratch community. Do we begin to allow articles about users, notable projects, and other community initiatives. Do we change the homepage to suit this more communal aspect (see the DACH homepage). Do we begin to advocate for a more prominent spot on the tips page? I hope that the Wiki Users and Administrators will begin to consider these questions as we move forward. Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 15:49, 17 February 2018 (CET)

The homepage

On the homepage under the file with loads of flags it says Scratch Wikipedia in many languages when it should say Scratch Wiki in many languages. Can someone change this please

According to my laptop, it is. I can see that it is in the code, and the text is still appearing, but there are no boxes around them.Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 16:30, 17 February 2018 (CET)

Scratch Team Page Template

Do we plan on keeping the Scratch Team Page Template now that the transfer is over? We could even edit it slightly. -Vuton- (Talk | Contribs | Pages) 19:27, 17 February 2018 (CET)

I made all pages that were at the "editlockedpages" (the ST pages that were ST-only, not even admins can edit) admin-protected for now, but we can reconsider them on a case-by-case basis (this only sort-of has to do with your post, but it's important to note).jvvg (talk | contribs) 02:42, 18 February 2018 (CET)

Should I make a page about the old wiki?

Should I make a page about the old Scratch Wiki? Idk if I should.290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 09:55, 18 February 2018 (CET)

OK. I'm creating a draft anyway just in case other people think it's a good idea and that the page should be made. Idk, you never know what will happen in the future.290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 10:38, 18 February 2018 (CET)

Community Portal must get faster

This CP page is surely the most edited page at the scratch wiki and I think its not acceptble that it stays so slow, because the accumulated 3-15 seconds that it always needs for each rendring costs us all to much lifetime. So now -as we have the full controll over the wiki - we should collect ideas how to accelerate it. What do you think? MartinWollenweberTalkContribsDirectory 08:58, 19 February 2018 (CET)

The original CP was always slow too; I think that's because of the ScratchSig extension, but I don't know how to make that faster because Scratch's user id mechanism makes it impossible to get the profile picture URL of a user without making at least one request :(kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 10:04, 19 February 2018 (CET)

I like your idea of moving only old topics to their own subpages! That might work better than those two ideas combined. Then I guess once the topic is done, in the next archive it gets moved to an archive as usual; and the subpage is redirected to the correct section of the archive? Yeah, that sounds really good!

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
I have found the problem: it is the ScratchSig extension slowing us down. It makes separate HTTP a request for every user to find where the image is stored (source). I tested this experimentally by disabling ScratchSig, and when I did, the CP loaded much faster. When I am able, I will develop a solution to cache this information, which should greatly improve performance.jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:18, 19 February 2018 (CET)

ScratchSig user icons are disabled for now

The ScratchSig user icons were causing performance problems on talk pages, especially the CP (see the topic above this for more information). As a temporary solution, we have disabled user icons in ScratchSigs, replacing them all with the default new user icon. Once we develop a way to cache user IDs (hopefully in the next week or two), we will return to having an icon for each user.jvvg (talk | contribs) 17:31, 19 February 2018 (CET)

@jvvg: Great! The CP is really fast now, after you switched of the user icons. Hope you will manage it to have the same speed also with icons. MartinWollenweberTalkContribsDirectory 19:57, 19 February 2018 (CET)

Well, that saved me from making a topic about what I thought was a glitch (I saw some wikians had the default icon, so I was about to report it as a glitch. Then I saw this and I didn’t make it). 78ch3 (talk | contribs) 09:11, 20 February 2018 (CET)

Signature problem.

It seems that people lose their profile picture if they do ~~~~ and if they have no custom signature.
290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 18:29, 19 February 2018 (CET)

User icons were temporarily disabled because they were slowing down the CP. They will be re-enabled soon once we fix a few things. A few topics up, I explained this in more detail.jvvg (talk | contribs) 18:40, 19 February 2018 (CET)

Updating the news

The automated curator announcements are currently down while jvvg updates the script for the new MediaWiki version - the new curator should come up once that's done.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 14:38, 20 February 2018 (CET)

News section

Thank you for the post, but I believe "its" is correct. bigpuppytalk|contribs 18:58, 25 February 2018 (CET)

Yes, "its" is the possessive form of "it" while "it's" is a contraction of "it is". Assuming the news is talking about something related to the SDS and not something similar to the SDS, it should be the possessive, not the contraction.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 08:33, 26 February 2018 (CET)

Discuss back on header?

Done

Hey so has anybody noticed that on the new ScratchWikiSkin header, the "Discuss" button is back? It begs the question as to whether the Scratch Team is planning on bringing it back fully. Just wanted to point it out.
Goldfish678 (talk | contribs) 23:00, 25 February 2018 (CET)

As the creator of the new skin, let me say why I left it in there. Yes, I left it in, the Scratch Team isn't bringing back discuss.

I left it in for two main reasons:

The Scratch Team wants the Wiki's design to be different from the Scratch website's so that it doesn't look like the Wiki is an MIT website. Keeping the discuss button (along with the pencil menu and the lack of a profile logo) helps do that.

The Wiki and the forums often go hand-in-hand. If you don't find what you want on the Wiki, the discuss button is there for you to ask the forums. When you ask, someone on the Wiki will notice and add the relevant information to the Wiki so that people like you won't need to ask again.

The Scratch Team had no part in the design of the new skin. I basically had full control over what was kept and what was changed. The question of whether the Scratch Team is planning on bringing it back is answered: they're not.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 04:16, 26 February 2018 (CET)

I fully agree to the explanation, skin design and decisions of kenny2scratch in relation to the „forum/discussion menu“-issue. You did a very good job ken! 🙂 MartinWollenweberTalkContribsDirectory 07:57, 27 February 2018 (CET)

Featured Article is not updated again...

"extended confirmed" usergroup

So on this wiki, we have four protection levels:

Allow autoconfirmed users

Allow bots, Experienced Wikians, and administrators

Allow Experienced Wikians and administrators

Allow only administrators

All of these have their uses, but a problem is that for most mainspace pages, if there is protection, then it's either not really protected (autoconfirmed applies to anyone who can edit anyway) or fully protected against users without a usergroup (EW is the first usergroup that anyone gets). Especially for pages that shouldn't really be edited by rather new users (like the Scratch Wiki:Guidelines), symbolic protection isn't really relevant.

So I propose something similar to Wikipedia's "extended confirmed" usergroup. This is a usergroup that is, like "autoconfirmed", assigned automatically, but requires higher confirmation: on Wikipedia, "extended confirmed" is granted at 30 days and 500 edits. For us, I guess it could be similar to election nomination requirements: 30 days and 50 mainspace edits. It would be automatically assigned by MediaWiki once the user had hit the threshold. With this usergroup, there would be a new protection level, "Require extended confirmed access", which would restrict editing to those with the extended confirmed usergroup. Guideline pages like the Scratch Wiki Guidelines could be protected at this level, so that the protection is not simply symbolic but doesn't restrict users too much; featured pages could (maybe?) be protected at this level so that those who are more experienced can make small edits if needed without having to ask an EW.

Sounds like the "New Scratcher" and "Scratcher" status for the Wiki, I think it couldn't hurt? Especially if only few pages are protected to not be editable by New Wikians :D Do we want to think up a nice name, like "Novice Wikian" for a normal user and "Wikian" for the user with 50 edits and so on? - LiFaytheGoblin (talk | contribs) 10:08, 1 March 2018 (CET)

I fully support this. It would prevent vandalism extremely well, as they would have to prove to be an active member of the community. A vandal would not go to the trouble of waiting a month and actually making 50 constructive edits to just get banned instantly. "Wikian" and "New Wikian". I have one question though: would it be done by a bot that promotes you exactly when you have passed the requirements? Because this is flawed, as a bot cannot tell whether edits are constructive or not. I would recommend a semi-automatic system, where a bot notifies a Bureaucrat when a user has reached the requirements, but a Bureaucrat has to manually check a sample of their edits to make sure that they were not vandalism and were constructive.Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 15:49, 2 March 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Actually, if you read the OP, the usergroup is granted by the software itself. You are correct in saying that there would not necessarily be constructive edits, but that's unavoidable. Again, it would also take a month - if they haven't made some constructive edits in a month, I would begin to wonder about their eligibility to be accepted in the first place.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 15:57, 2 March 2018 (CET)

I think this is a great idea — I also support the names KrIsMa came up with. Maybe this will also motivate people to make edits.bigpuppytalk|contribs 00:24, 3 March 2018 (CET)

en: should work here: "Interwiki to myself" makes sense

en: is not configurated here, but it would make sense, to have the Interwiki-Link also always for a wiki of that language itself e.g. for consistence (you could copy between all international scratch wikis and it would always look the same + things like tw:Test-Scratch-Wiki:Watch work
MartinWollenweberTalkContribsDirectory 12:30, 1 March 2018 (CET)

ScratchSig icons are back

After a lot of fun dealing with caching, we now have ScratchSig icons again! Please let me know if there are any issues. The way they're set up right now, the cache file lasts a week, so if you change your user icon, it will take up to a week to update it here (or, if you ask me politely, I can reset the cache file for you).jvvg (talk | contribs) 19:57, 2 March 2018 (CET)

Great! Much Thanks to user:jvvg for not giving up after the first unsuccesfull attempts..that must have been hard work! I'm really happy that now we have both: A fast CP and user icons for all. Well done! MartinWollenweberTalkContribsDirectory 12:00, 3 March 2018 (CET)

New rule regarding turning off WikiMonitor

In the past few weeks, several people have turned off WikiMonitor for invalid reasons. From now on, if you turn off WikiMonitor and do not immediately tell me why on my talk page, it will be considered vandalism. I have added messages to the shutoff page explaining that.jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:15, 3 March 2018 (CET)

Fix the wikian magic word

The way auto-promotion works, it checks on-the-fly if you're in the group and it isn't actually assigned to you in the database, so unfortunately we can't fix it. I will remove the reference though.jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:23, 3 March 2018 (CET)

The ban thing

Now that the Wiki is controlled by users, will it be possible to hide the thing that says who's banned? I don't think it should be deleted, because it might be useful for users that can ban. I think it should be made so only users than can ban can see it. Ziggy741 (talk | contribs) 20:30, 3 March 2018 (CET)

In Scratch Website, a feature to see if someone is banned is one of rejected suggestions.

Unfortunately the only decent extension I can find that lets us do that is Lockdown, which does not work on this version of MediaWiki. If anyone is aware of any other good extensions that support this, please let us know.jvvg (talk | contribs) 23:59, 3 March 2018 (CET)

It looks like oversight was just a precursor to the built-in functionality to censor revisions, it doesn't look like it allowed for hiding special pages.jvvg (talk | contribs) 01:56, 4 March 2018 (CET)

Would it still be possible for users that can ban users to see who's banned if there was that? Ziggy741 (talk | contribs) 02:20, 4 March 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Yeah with $wgGroupPermissions['oversight']['viewsuppressed'] = true;
"oversight" is a new user group, but it can also be "bureaucrat"Apple502jTalk/Activities1,754edit 01:27, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
The page should now be hidden to normal users. I ended up using a trick involving hooks. If anyone wants the code to use on another Wiki, let me know.jvvg (talk | contribs) 05:56, 4 March 2018 (CET)

Okay! Also, it says the page doesn't exist. Does it still work for bureaucrats? Ziggy741 (talk | contribs) 20:16, 4 March 2018 (CET)

Yes, it does. I made it so the page is only recognized if you have the "block" permission (i.e. only those who can block users can see the block list).jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:33, 4 March 2018 (CET)

linking to this wiki on Scratch

So with the recent domain move the ST is planning on redirecting their wiki domain to ours with a warning to tell users they are being redirected away from the scratch domain. So, can we even link to this wiki via comments? KrIsMauser | talk | contribs | edits 01:41, 4 March 2018 (CET)

After the latest email update, it's confirmed that wiki.scratch.mit.edu will be directly redirected to scratch-wiki.info - which is great for speed, since it saves a click, but bad for search indexing (though maybe I can set up the metadata to work better). And FYI we will eventually be able to directly link to all the language wikis, as Apple said above, in comments - the redirection is to handle old links that haven't been updated.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 04:48, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Recommend User for the wiki

Hey I want to recommend a user for the Japanese wiki can I do that?
--Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 20:15, 4 March 2018 (CET)

The last one was actually protected because it was used as the icon in ScratchSigs back when I was trying to fix the icons. However, now that icons are back, that file no longer needs to be protected, so I unprotected it.jvvg (talk | contribs) 15:50, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Public wiki talk

So I think there should be a public version of the community portal where even non wiki editors can post on. As if people have questions for th w the wiki the whole community can help not jut an EW who they might not even know who they are. Thoughts?

Since having a page here that anyone can edit would open up additional moderation concerns, I'm with Martin in that we should make a forum thread instead. I think that the thread could go in the Questions about Scratch subforum - maybe a sticky topic about the Wiki? Then that could be a Community Portal, but for everyone, and moderation is taken care of.

As much as I'd love to have you make it since you proposed it, I think it would be more convincing and feel more official if a bureaucrat on the Wiki made the thread - I guess you can feel free to get first post (maybe mention how the thread came to be, linking back to here)kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 13:52, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok. Could I maybe get a shoutout on the post like thanks to asqwde for coming up with the idea of something like that?

WikiEditor Extension

Done

Can you install it? It is on the test wiki. It is a good tool. It enhances the editing toolbar. It comes with mediawiki. Just put require_once "$IP/extensions/WikiEditor/WikiEditor.php";
--JayceeMinecraft (talk | contribs) 17:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I agree because comes with Mediawiki an only must be activated to have some help with formating wiki-syntax in the editor. You could activate it to see the difference and deactivate later it if you don't like it.

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Unfortunately, admins do not actually have access to the code running the Wiki. However, we can ask a member of the Scratch Team to install it.jvvg (talk | contribs) 16:48, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

@jvvg I tried scmb1. No response. Jvvg, since you are well known could you try asking somebody please? --JayceeMinecraft (talk | contribs) 17:08, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

scmb1 is very busy - i emailed her and she still hasn't gotten back to me. this is about the 2nd week

Yeah, if you look at her profile, you'll see that I voiced my support to your comment. However, she is a college student (or at least was last year, I don't know what year she is), and is very busy and may take a while to get back to us. For now, we just have to wait.jvvg (talk | contribs) 00:57, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Scratch Team Involvement in the Wiki

Not done - since just edited

I have found two articles that are protected and only the Scratch Team can edit that are in much need of updating, clean up, or keeping up to wiki standards.

For example, Scratch Helper Groups is very short, and I would consider it a stub. Also, I believe "Future additions include groups that will support giving project feedback and moderating the Scratch forums." is no longer accurate.

Scratch Press is another good example. There are typos, missing categories, and missing templates on this page. "Lifehacker (February 2015) Top 10 Ways to Teacher Yourself to Code" should be "Lifehacker (February 2015) Top 10 Ways to Teach Yourself to Code". The page should have an External Programs and a Scratch Team Page template. It should also be categorized under Category:Scratch Culture.

How do we get the Scratch Team more involved in what happens on the wiki? What do we do to fix articles like these that aren't editable by us? Are there any active Scratch Team members that have wiki accounts or are interested in the wiki? Can these problems be fixed by an admin or EW?purplebook163 | Talk | Contribs | Edits 📖 📕 🔖 22:44, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

The Wiki is fairly autonomous and the Scratch Team really doesn't do much with it. Consequently, most of them don't really know how it works that well and aren't familiar with the writing standards we use. It would be nice to have the Scratch Team involved, as having technical issues resolved can take up to a week, even though the issue itself may be fairly simple. The possible upshot is that I may be going to MIT this fall (if I get in, fingers crossed), and if I do, they will likely let me administer the Wiki as a Scratch Team member. However, in the meantime, I actually can't edit the pages. They are only editable by Scratch Team members.jvvg (talk | contribs) 23:01, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

user:LiFaytheGoblin could surely help: She is DACH-Scratch-Wiki-Author and Admin and currently became a new Scratch-Team-Member. Also Christan (user ceebee) a member of the Scratch-Team visited our weekley online hangout de:Scratch Club curently. The Scratch-Team seems to be interested to make more conections to the Scratch-Wikis again. An article with suggestions and wishes, how the Wikis could be even more connected with the Scratch-Mainpage and the Community could be a good idea. MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 19:15, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I only have normal user rights here in the wiki as far as I see... However if I had the rights, I'd prefer if people rewrite the article on their talk page and I copy it over, so I don't have to worry about my english... - LiFaytheGoblin (Talk) 22:57, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@Lifay: I suggest you ask the Scratch-Team to give you Bureaucrats-Rights:I think you would care for the wiki much more than anyone else of the Scratch-Team. I would also be happy if user:jvvg would get Scratch-Team-Member and Bureaucrat, because he is one of the most experienced Scratch-Wiki-Admins, but for the moment I think the fastest way getting a wiki-experienced-scratch-team-bureaucrat is Lifay applying for it. -- MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs) 00:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I have the ST status in the Wiki now, so if you need anything, feel free to talk to me on my talk page... - LiFaytheGoblin (Talk) 18:48, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

@LiFaytheGoblin: Congratulation to your ST-Rights at the Scratch-Wiki that will profit much by that!

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Done - the Wiki has been moved and now we have bureaucrats of our own. Also the "editlockedpages" usergroup is dead.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 05:26, 18 February 2018 (CET)

Scratch Extensions

I have compiled a list of Scratch Extensions I believe dont have an article, and some are up for debate. Any numbers at the time of this posting are from the extension download site (The Chrome Web Store), and not the extensions' site, at the time this was posted. I do not endorse or say that any of these are safe:

Scratch User Stats - Scratch User Stats was created by the user World_Languages and is a webpage where users can view statistics for any user on Scratch. The official website is at https://scratchuserstats.blogspot.com/ .

Isn't Scratch Device Plugin Helper part of an already-existent article?

But anyway, I don't believe that any of those extensions deserve an article. All of them (except SDPH) are user-generated content, which goes against the Wiki Guidelines. isOnline is currently only being considered because it caused an exceptional stir in the community of users, and so the exceptions in S:NOSP might apply.

On a different note, what happened? I don't think you've ever failed to sign your post like this. You alright?kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 00:26, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Are you implying that him forgetting to sign his post means he is ill or something?? 02:03, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying, but IsOnline is also "User Generated Content" - made by users of Scratch. So what makes that important and not the others?Cυƨтσмнαcκεя(тαʟκ | cσптяıв) 03:23, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Well I think "user-generated content" refers more to projects made by users. Extensions and such even though they may be made by users can be significant enough for an article. Personally after finally learning about IsOnline I wouldn't mine an article on it. 03:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I have not seen an article for Scratch Device Plugin Helper, and if it doesn't exist I think it may be worthy of an article due to it's high use in comparison to others. I also believe that there is already a discussion of IsOnline just a little bit up. For the others, I just think that they don't have a large enough impact to really warrant their own article page.Duckboycool (talk | contribs) 13:54, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I know about the discussion above, it is getting a little bit harder to find. So I guess the 3 of us can agree on IO and SDPH?Cυƨтσмнαcκεя(тαʟκ | cσптяıв) 14:40, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@customhacker: Make that 4. @Turkey3: I was saying they normally don't fail to sign their posts like that. Anyway, I'm fine with IO and SDPH but leave the rest without articles.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 14:49, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Im going to release a poll in the Suggestions Forum if that is ok?Cυƨтσмнαcκεя(тαʟκ | cσптяıв) 15:10, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I would love to have got involved in this discussion on the wiki's CP, but I'm currently in the process of getting my password back. You have my permission to post this under my name at the CP if you want to.

Firstly, I do support the addition of the Scratch Device Plugin Helper, as it was made by the Scratch Team and is thus official. The wiki already has a lot of articles that are only partially related to Scratch, such as Scratch Jr.

Regarding the others, I think it is important to look at what the expectations are of other user-made content before we decide. Certainly, users and projects aren't allowed (with certain exceptions such as Kaj). Collaborations were formerly allowed, but we decided they weren't notable enough, and only left certain special examples in the end.

Mods are allowed though and considering extensions and mods can both be viewed as ‘add-ons’ they should, I believe, be treated equally. The current criteria for modifications is that they should be ‘extremely notable’. Unfortunately though, this seems rather hard to define. Perhaps we should investigate the amount of downloads that some of the Scratch modifications on the Wiki received, and guide the definition of ‘extremely notable’ by that figure. If any of these user-made extensions are worthy though, it definitely sounds as though Scratch Messaging Extension may be with its 2700 downloads, and IsOnlinev2 seems quite widely used too.

Another idea is a criteria like what was suggested here. Any notable add-on would surely have enough information to write a good article about it, and it seems fair that the license should be the same or similar to Scratch's.

Okay. Based off of what people are saying in the topic so far, we may want to add Scratch User Stats to this list. I'm just not sure how much there is to say about it.Duckboycool (talk | contribs) 19:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

A Question on articles for Extensions, specifically isOnline

Not done

I have come to question an article for isOnline (iOv2) or any other user created extensions. First of all, would it break the rules listed in S:NOSP. There are exceptions, but does it fit? S:NOSP states:

“

Almost all articles about users and user-generated content will be deleted. The wiki is not the place for advertisements or biographies; these pages may end up being targets for vandalism (e.g. "this user was mean!"). The exceptions to this rule are:

Topics that have been considered important/notable enough in Scratch's history by a majority of wiki editors that they deserve an article. (ex. Kaj, Removed Pac-Man Project, etc.)

Projects may be linked to as examples to get the point of an article across more effectively, such as on Pen Projects. They must, however, be relevant to the topic and work adequately well.

Trends that are notably popular; the trends must be practiced by many Scratchers. One example of this is the Toki trend started by Maki-Tak a few years ago.

Specific instances of this trend may also be used in the same way as example projects. For exam

ple, the Collaboration page has examples of several notable collaborations started on Scratch.

If a username is mentioned (e.g. the creator of a Scratch Modification) do not make a link to that user's Scratch profile or Wiki user page.

”

First, iOv2 is user generated content. Though it seems the Wiki community has made a decision on it, and has already made an article as I am typing this. But what is the Scratch community's' input on this?

Second, would we really have enough to put on that article? We can add updates, but what else.

Third, are we advertising this extension? We are part of a Wiki at an educational site of one of the most prestigious colleges in the world. Does the college, does the Scratch Team, approve and support this extension?

Fourth, "isOnlineV2" is the official spelling of the extension, not "IsOnlineV2."

On a final note, I would like us to reevaluate our decision to include this as an article one last time.

First off, I think that we should have at least a list of browser extensions. Like the ExtensionScratch Device Plugin Helper, which was made by the ST. There's also Scratch Messaging Extension, made by griffpatch, #Bring It Back, lots of extensions. But I do support the idea of an isOnline wiki page, just to inform people about what it is and how it works.

Could we get some more Wiki community input. Wikians, Ews, Admins?Cυƨтσмнαcκεя(тαʟκ | cσптяıв) 14:50, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't know about it, It is a very popular and useful extension. Thoughts Admins? -Vuton- (Talk | Contribs | Pages) 18:16, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

I thought there was an EW here :). Anyhow- it seems to me that we have made articles for very notable extensions and that isOnline was receiving an article for being the most-used community extension which exists. Although based on the thisandagain quote we may want to reevaluate it :)Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 19:17, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Devil's Advocate:

The page seems to be written like a how-to page rather than an informative page. I'm sure isonline provides the same information on their website.

Most of the extensions/mods we have have some sort of affiliation with Scratch OR they have been used by Scratch. The quote that Makethebrainhappy is referring to shows clearly that the Scratch Team is not endorsing or connected with the extension.

Third, are we advertising this extension? We are part of a Wiki at an educational site of one of the most prestigious colleges in the world. Does the college, does the Scratch Team, approve and support this extension?

-sip-

On a final note, I would like us to reevaluate our decision to include this as an article one last time.

I still support the article. Plus if IsOnline ever goes away the Wiki would be there to document its historical notability. 17:26, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I see your point, but the thing with me is that by having this article, I believe that we are showing the the ST and MIT support these extensions. If iO ever goes sour, than we will have to document that too, correct? So does the ST support the article and by extension, the extension itself, does the college do the same?Cυƨтσмнαcκεя(тαʟκ | cσптяıв) 17:42, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

We have a quote from thisandagain stating that the ST doesn't support isOnline. Also, we have a wiki page on something called Kurt which I didn't even know existed until I clicked the random page button. So if THAT gets a page, isOnline definitely should.Pylar (talk | contribs) 18:08, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

There's also the issue of pages that exist on the Wiki that wouldn't be allowed of this day. Kurt, and the other mod pages would of gone through the same amount of discussion if the page were created on this day rather than in 2013, etc.

But the question is: Are those mods completely supported by the ST? I am aware that iO is not.Cυƨтσмнαcκεя(тαʟκ | cσптяıв) 18:28, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Of course not, they'll never officially support anything that's not theirs because don't want to be liable if something goes wrong with a program beyond their control. 21:25, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

So then should they be deleted? Or, Should we move these to a category of users' extensions with a sice red template saying that these are only to document popular extensions and are not supported by the ST?Cυƨтσмнαcκεя(тαʟκ | cσптяıв) 14:56, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Done Banned. iO article was already deleted by ST.

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I like the idea, but I think it should stay as it is the same as the normal Scratch Webpage.Cυƨтσмнαcκεя(тαʟκ | cσптяıв) 22:15, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea! I didn't really notice this for a while. It would easily help me distinguish between which tabs I have open that are Scratch and the wiki. ᙡᗝᒪFᙅᗩT67 ( Talk | Contributions | Subpages ) 22:54, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

The Scratch Cat is a trademark of Scratch - just as the S is. I think the wiki is separate enough from Scratch to have its own favicon. I say the wiki globe is better.kenny2scratchTalkContribsDirectory 12:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
I think the Wiki Globe is better. The Wiki is separate from the main Scratch website enough that the favicons can be different. KrIsMauser | talk | contribs | edits 14:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree. Like Kenny2scratch said, the wiki globe still has the Scratch Cat on it, so people would probably still know it was about Scratch.bigpuppytalk|contribs 14:43, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@Bigpuppy Or, you know, the name of the wiki and the subject might make people realize it's about Scratch. ᙡᗝᒪFᙅᗩT67 ( Talk | Contributions | Subpages ) 17:59, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, bad wording. I meant it should still be related to Scratch (like it shouldn't just be the Wikipedia logo). And the wiki globe maintains that while still being the wiki globe.bigpuppytalk|contribs 18:14, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Done; the wiki has been moved to a new domain and the icon has been changed.bigpuppytalk|contribs 17:28, 17 February 2018 (CET)